Final answer:
Both Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission involve the First Amendment right to free speech. The decisions in these cases expanded spending allowances based on the First Amendment, and the McCutcheon decision supports the elite model of democracy.
Step-by-step explanation:
The civil liberty that is common in both Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) and McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (2013) is the First Amendment right to free speech. In Citizens United, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations and unions have the same free speech rights as individuals, and that campaign spending is a form of speech. This decision was then used as a basis for the reasoning in McCutcheon, where the court struck down aggregate contribution limits, further expanding the spending allowances based on the First Amendment.
The decision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission can be used to support the elite model of democracy. The elite model posits that a small group of influential individuals or organizations has a significant impact on decision-making in a democracy. By removing contribution limits and allowing unlimited spending, McCutcheon reinforces the notion that those with wealth and resources have a greater influence on the political process.